RRN Online Volume 588

September 08 '07
Volume 588

Anniversary Dinner Woody's Restaurant Tupelo

Surprise Number Two To celebrate our Fortieth Wedding Anniversary, Barbara and I chose to invite three other couples to join us for dinner at Woody’s Restaurant in Tupelo, on Saturday evening, August 18, 2007. As shared in two previous articles, I planned to surprise Barbara with a diamond necklace and a framed poem I had sung to her forty years earlier.

Barbara was aware of our plans to eat out, but she did not expect or anticipate additional gifts, which made it all the more important for the gifts to be a surprise. Virginia Huskison helped in this respect by getting the framed poem wrapped and then a gift bag to hold both gifts. She and Neal rode to Tupelo with Jerry and Dot Bell and kept the gifts in the trunk of the car until all of our party was seated inside.

The good thing about reservations is in not having to wait for seating. Once we were inside the lobby of the restaurant, I announced to the hostess that the Carter, party of eight, had arrived. She immediately ushered us to the dining area for seating and explained our waitress would be with us shortly.

At least two tables were joined to create a long table to accommodate three persons on each side and one on each end. I sat at one end, with Barbara, Shirley Hale, and Joel Hale to my left. Neal Huskison sat opposite me with his wife, Virginia, Jerry Bell and Dot Bell to his left. The seating made it possible for us to communicate pretty well with one another, but since Neal and I were separated the greatest distance, we had trouble hearing each other.

At one point during the evening, we discovered the combined number of years of marriage of the four couples present in our group totaled 181. Even now, I’d like to imagine there’s not a lot we couldn’t share in the way of advice to a pair of newlyweds, based on our respective experiences.

Our waitress for the evening told us she normally helped with the restaurant’s catering service but was pulled off her regular job to help as a waitress. She shared that her name was Dana and soon busied herself with our drink orders.

Minutes after we were seated, Jerry Bell discretely excused himself to appropriate the gifts from the trunk of his car. Jerry left the gifts at the front desk for safe-keeping until it was time to surprise Barbara. The restaurant offered several appetizers, but none of us opted for any of them. Most of us ordered a salad with our meal, but Jerry Bell and I did not. I don’t know about Jerry, but I’ve learned, I can’t eat a big salad and a big steak in one sitting.

Three of the men ordered the New York Strip. Three of the ladies ordered grilled salmon. Barbara chose stuffed pork tenderloin for her entrée and Neal and Virginia split Virginia’s salmon plate. The freshly baked bread which was generously offered with both our salads and entrées was made all the more tasty with the accompanying blackberry butter.

Jerry and Joel commented that their steaks were delicious and cooked to their liking. Mine was more medium than medium rare, but it was both tasteful and tender. Barbara, of whom my mother used to say, "she eats like a bird," managed to consume all the food on her plate. Shirley, Dot, Virginia and Neal declared their salmon was also delicious.

When it was apparent everyone had finished their respective meals, I nudged Dot Bell to signal her it was time to get Barbara’s gifts.

Dot excused herself rather abruptly, and asked where the restrooms were. When she returned, she was followed by our waitress who handed me the bag of gifts, which I passed to Barbara.

Initially, Barbara believed the gifts were from our friends. The two gifts were wrapped together with the small jewelry box atop the wrapped picture frame. Thus Barbara opened the smaller package first. As she did so, Dot Bell asked if I had brought a camera. I fished mine out of my pocket and asked her to make the pictures. Had I made them, at least one would have blurred, but Dot’s turned out perfect. She captured the surprise on Barbara’s face on two successive shots and then made a good picture of Barbara and me admiring the necklace.

It was only when Barbara discovered the necklace had diamonds that she realized our friends had not gone-in together for the gift and that it was from me.

"Did you do this?" she asked.

"Yes, that’s from me," I responded, smiling broadly.

The framed poem was inside a box with padding to avoid breakage, and it took a while for Barbara to get it unwrapped. She had begun to think her second gift would be inside a series of boxes of decreasing size, when the frame finally appeared.

The sight of her obvious pleasure with the necklace was a gratifying experience for me, in that her reaction affirmed my choice as a good one. As soon as Barbara saw the poem, I received further affirmation I had chosen wisely.

"I think I’m going to cry," she stated as she studied the poem and the photographed picture that was included on the same sheet.

I’ve yet to be verbally praised by even one male who felt the gifts I chose for Barbara suited the occasion, but, to a woman, the comments of every female who’s seen or heard about the gifts have been identically phrased.

"You did good," they told me, and to Barbara the response was similar, "He did good!"

Upon hearing Barbara’s tearful comment, Dana, our waitress, responded by going to Barbara’s side and asking if she were all right. Barbara explained that she was and showed her the necklace and the poem.

Dana responded with, "Where did you find him?"

"On my doorsteps," Barbara replied.

While it sounded funny to everyone, it was truthful. Frankie Gaillard my cousin’s wife, and Virginia O’Kelly, Barbara’s sister, had arranged for the two of us to meet. Frankie introduced us at the doorway of Barbara’s home.

Though Dana asked if anyone at our table would like a dessert, there were no takers. Most likely, our group felt as though there wasn’t room for a dessert. It was then that Dana announced she wanted to treat us to a Bananas Foster dessert.

"I’ll make one and y’all can divide it," she stated. "I’m not going to charge you for it."

Since we had watched her prepare the dessert for a couple seated near us, earlier, and because it was a special occasion, we suddenly decided we might be able to consume a few more bites, after all.

"Each couple can have one scoop of ice cream with some of the bananas and sauce poured over it," she instructed once the alcohol had burned off, flambé style. "Y’all will have to share."

The special treat topped off our special evening and was appreciated by all.

It’s too early to predict what Barbara and I will do if we’re lucky enough to live to celebrate our Fiftieth Wedding Anniversary. I doubt I’ll be able to outdo this anniversary, at least not on the same budget, but I imagine that we will dine out to celebrate the occasion. We might even choose the same restaurant.

Fred Thompson Essay By Mark Alexander

Fred Dalton Thompson announced his candidacy for President this week—adding his name to a lengthy list of Republican contenders.

Traditionally, Presidential candidates have announced their intentions after Labor Day, but that tradition has given way to "campaignus infinitum ad nauseam." Criticized by media talkingheads for his "late entry," Thompson expressed his doubt that voters will say, "That guy would make a very good president, but he didn’t get in soon enough."

After all, says Thompson, "People treat politicians sort of like dentists—they don’t have anything to do with them till they have to."

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, arguably the most articulate constitutional constructionist to hold that post in the last century, recently offered this assessment of the political process: "What’s the job of the candidate in this world? The job of the candidate is to raise the money to hire the consultants to do the focus groups to figure out the 30-second answers to be memorized by the candidate. This is stunningly dangerous."

Notably, responding to inquiries about his own interest in a presidential bid, Gingrich added, "If Fred Thompson runs... then I think that makes it easier for me to not run."

What does the timing of Fred Thompson’s announcement say about him as a candidate? Well, mostly that he is a leader, not a follower. To his credit, Thompson is not a "formula candidate." He doesn’t comport with the expectations of Beltway politicos, commentators and media types, and his campaign won’t be as slick as some of his opponents in both parties.

For the record, however, I know Fred Thompson—the man. I know his character, his intellect and his sincerity, and I know his views on the supremacy of our Constitution. Fred’s style is evocative of Ronald Reagan’s strengths. Like Reagan, Thompson speaks right over the heads of his opponents and the Leftmedia, directly to the people. For that reason and more, the Democrats fear Fred Thompson.

In 1993, Tennessee’s Republican leadership convinced Thompson, a relative unknown, to campaign for the unexpired Senate term of then-Vice President Albert Gore. He could have been just a sacrificial lamb, but on the campaign trail Fred demonstrated his ability to win the hearts and minds of Republican and Democrat voters.

Despite all the support Bill Clinton and Al Gore could muster for Fred’s opponent, popular six-term Democrat Rep. Jim Cooper, Thompson won a landslide victory in 1994, garnering 61 percent of the vote. It was the largest victory margin in any statewide political contest in Tennessee history.

Thompson’s tour de force didn’t go unnoticed by the Democratic [sic] National Committee, nor did his 1996 re-election bid, which he won by an even wider margin. Rest assured, the DNC fears Thompson.

As a two-term senator from Tennessee, Thompson never forgot who brung him to the dance. His voting record is clear, and it establishes his standing as an unequivocal constitutional constructionist. For this reason, he garnered not only the respect of his constituents, but also the admiration of colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

Like his primary opponent, Rep. Ron Paul, Thompson loathes politicos who subscribe to the notion of a "Living Constitution," those who, for political expediency, have abandoned their oaths to "support and defend" that singular document.

"Our people have shed more blood for liberty and freedom... than all the other countries put together," says Thompson, yet the central government "can’t seem to get the most basic responsibilities right for its citizens."

Like Rep. Paul, Thompson’s commitment to uphold the plain language of our Constitution has put him on the short end of a couple of votes during his tenure (99-1 in the Senate), and his devotion to his oath of office led to several controversial votes. In 1999, for example, when the Senate voted on the impeachment of Bill Clinton, Thompson voted in the affirmative on the question of whether Clinton had obstructed justice, but joined nine other Republicans voting against conviction on the perjury charge, believing that this charge did not meet the constitutional test for removing a president from office.

Thompson’s philosophy and record are most clear in regard to constitutional exegesis pertaining to federalism and state’s rights, as specified by the Tenth Amendment to the Bill of Rights.

That amendment states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

This language is specific about the limitations our Constitution places upon the central government and the rights and responsibilities reserved by the several states and the people. Nonetheless, Democrats, and the judicial activists who do their bidding, have, for five decades, evaded the plain language of our Constitution by insisting that it be adulterated by judicial diktat in order to serve the special interests of their constituents.

It is notable, that on Fred Thompson’s campaign website, under the category of "Principles," there is only one item: Federalism.

In his exposition on federalism, Thompson notes, "Before anything else, folks in Washington ought to be asking first and foremost, ‘Should government be doing this? And if so, then at what level of government?’ But they don’t. The result has been decades of growth in the size, scope and function of national government. Today’s governance of mandates, pre-emptions, regulations and federal programs bears little resemblance to the balanced system the Framers intended... A government powerful enough to give you everything can take away from you, anything. Our government must be limited by the powers delegated to it by the Constitution."

On that note, it is clear that Thompson will give Republican front-runners Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, both "big-government Republicans," a run for their money. The next debate is 17 September, four months ahead of the first state primaries. With Thompson in the lineup, expect a real debate. One thing will be abundantly clear at the end of that debate: Unlike the other frontrunners, Fred Thompson does not "need" to be President in order to satiate arrogant ambition. He is driven by one motive—to humbly serve his countrymen, to promote our national security, unity and prosperity—and do so within the constraints of our Constitution.

Source: The Patriot Post Vol. 7-36

Bodock Beau Retirement Thoughts

The following came our way via email from Ralph Jones. Labeled as "Retirement Thoughts," I’m of the opinion one need not wait until retirement to consider them.

Retirement Thoughts

I planted some bird seed. A bird came up. Now I don't know what to feed it.
I had amnesia once -- or twice.
I went to San Francisco. I found someone's heart. Now what?
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic.
All I ask is a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
If the world was a logical place, men would ride horses sidesaddle.
What is a "free" gift? Aren't all gifts free?
They told me I was gullible ... and I believed them.
Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and when he grows up, he'll never be able to merge his car onto a freeway.
Two can live as cheaply as one, for half as long.
Experience is the thing you have left when everything else is gone.
What if there were no hypothetical questions?
One nice thing about egotists: They don't talk about other people.
When the only tool you own is a hammer, every problem begins to look like a nail.
A flashlight is a case for holding dead batteries.
What was the greatest thing before sliced bread? Hmmm?
My weight is perfect for my height -- which varies.
I used to be indecisive? Now I'm not sure.
The cost of living hasn't affected its popularity.
Where do forest rangers go to "get away from it all"?
The speed of time is one-second per second.
Is it possible to be totally partial?
What's another word for thesaurus?
Is Marx's tomb a communist plot?
If swimming is so good for your figure, how do you explain whales?
Is it my imagination, or do buffalo wings taste like chicken?

Home